The U.S. nuclear industry appears to have learned a thing or two from how the oil and gas industry handled the aftermath of last year’s Gulf of Mexico spill.

As the drama over a possible nuclear meltdown in Japan continues to unfold, the U.S. nuclear industry has already been credited for being more transparent and aggressive in providing explanations and updates than the petroleum industry was in the early days after the April 20 blowout of BP’s Macondo well.

Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

“The nuclear industry has been responding as well as they can to the current situation,” said Michael Levi, a senior fellow for energy and the environment at the Council on Foreign Relations. “They have resisted the urge to be defensive. They have not engaged in policy debates yet. And they have made themselves the credible source for technical information.”

In comparison, the oil and gas industry was largely silent at first after the Macondo disaster. “It took a long time for them to respond in a meaningful fashion,” said a veteran communicator for the industry who requested anonymity. “I think they were somewhere between having a defensive posture and just acting like a deer caught in headlights.”

One major difference: The current crisis is in Japan, so the U.S. nuclear industry is escaping the culpability and geographic closeness that BP and other companies faced in the Gulf. But the industry still will have much to defend in the coming weeks as the United States’ 104 aging nuclear power plants are scrutinized for their vulnerability to earthquakes, tsunamis and other threats.

The two crises have similarities, however. The desperate efforts to avoid a meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi plant — such as dumping seawater into reactors to cool them — seem reminiscent of last year’s efforts to cap the BP well.

Nearly a year after the Gulf disaster, though, the oil and gas industry has almost miraculously avoided any post-spill legislation that could have increased its liability for future accidents, although companies now face more stringent regulations from the Department of the Interior. The industry has also managed to turn the tables on the Obama administration, spurring a growing outcry in Congress about what critics call Interior’s sluggish pace in issuing deepwater drilling permits.

“The oil industry as a whole actually seemed to react pretty well after a stumble out of the gate,” said one former Clinton White House official and expert on energy public relations, who requested anonymity to speak more freely. “They were slow to understand the implications after the first week or two, but once they [did], they seemed to get on top of the situation.”

Readers' Comments (2)

Well, Israel has already built (w/SDE) a whole New Energy Source Technology Sector with in-house manufacturing for a Flotation Panel Collection of TIDAL Flows (instead of underwater wind turbines= sea life friendly) used in their New Power Station @ Joppa's Port"

1) Big Corps. (Even Oil & Coal) Make $

2) We Get Jobs

3) Debt Gets Down To Zero &

4) Costal Regions Off Oil or Coal. (tiny Israel got 20% Electricity from that one Port of Joppa)

DETAILS? = [ 1) 2 Tides have 4 Tidal Flows at the union of Chesapeake Bay & Atlantic Ocean 2) Land at the "Deep Creek" Tide-Position is cheap w/an agreeable population 3) Oil & Coal Run Project To Make Money 4) use paid back Auto- TARP as the Public Part of Partnership & 5) We Get JOBS.]

Did They Learn To Visit Israel's New Power Station @ Port of Joppa? (A 'Partnership w/ SDE's Flotation-Collection Systems) Or just how to protect the koch interests?